-
Are There any audiophiles on this forum ?
First what is an audiophile ? High -End Audio The complete Guide defines an audiophile "Attempt at making the hardware disappear , when listening for pleasure or listening critically , constantly changing equipment , listening to the equipment rather than the music."
I have noticed that the majority of the audio equipment displayed on AV is not high -end .
Whether vintage are new .
"
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
I have noticed that the majority of the audio equipment displayed on AV is not high -end."
And.......
-
Another cohesive and well thought out question from Melvin!
Its a garbage question if you're going to rely on that garbage definition. In the first part of the definition, an audiophile is trying to "make the equipment disappear." But, in the second part of the definition, the audiophile is "listening to the equipment rather than the music." The definition defeats itself. Also, "constantly changing equipment" doesn't define anything. If that were criteria, then SVI would be the most accomplished audiophile here.
Mel, you jump from what is an "audiophile" to what is "hi-end." The two are not related. Being an audiophile is not dependant on the equipment you own. It is dependant on you level of appreciation. You can be an audiophile with no equipment. If you are going to the free concert series in local parks, you can be an audiophile. If you're doing the rounds of the hi-fi shops on the weekends, you can be an audiophile. Just as you can an oneophile relying on free wine tastings.
-
That depends. Do you believe that being an audiophile is dependent on the price a person pays for their audio equipment? I don't see that in your definition, but it appears to be what matters to you.
So, what definition are we going by?
-
"listening to the equipment rather than the music."
What a horrid way to listen to music. That's like focusing in on a tiny imperfection on a beautiful woman's shoulder while making slow, sweet love.
After years of "critical listening" with a specific goal in mind, I'm just pleased as punch that my systems do an excellent job of making the music I listen to at home sound very much like the music I listen to live considering the physical and economic constraints that we mere mortals must abide by.
That was the aforementioned "specific goal" I had in mind. Once that goal has been achieved to one's own satisfaction, what's the point of continuing? You can only go half way into the forest before you start coming out of it.
Apparently, since you swear your 50 year-old JBL's are the epitome of speaker design and the Marantz 7C/9 combo is the ultimate in amplifier design, you can't logically argue this point.
And, as for that "making the hardware disappear" stuff, just leave your equipment on the street or your front porch. Believe me, it''ll disappear.
You might want to try on a new suit. The old one is getting threadbare.
-
Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?
What or you trying to say?
Yeah, I caught it, too.
-
Slumpy's Sub $350.00 "audiophile" kit: Grado SR-60 headphones ($69), Project Head Box MkII ($129), Cambridge DVD player or the like on Ebay for approx $125.
Anyone care to argue?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
First what is an audiophile ? High -End Audio The complete Guide defines an audiophile "Attempt at making the hardware disappear , when listening for pleasure or listening critically , constantly changing equipment , listening to the equipment rather than the music."
I have noticed that the majority of the audio equipment displayed on AV is not high -end .
Whether vintage are new .
"
Based on your definition there are numerous audiophiles on this site... However, you are clearly not one of them....
The fact that you hold on to 50 year old equipment... means that you are not 'constantly changing equipment'...
And further, I would suspect that many of the posters here have spent more on audio equipment in the last 3 years, than you have in the last 20.... so to use your own words to describe your behaviour, it's.... CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP.....
Now stop pretending that your vintage gear is the best thing ever made, as an excuse to justify the fact that you can no longer afford 'high end' equipment... and even better yet... stop pretending to be an audiophile....
-
First of all
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
First what is an audiophile ? High -End Audio The complete Guide defines an audiophile "Attempt at making the hardware disappear , when listening for pleasure or listening critically , constantly changing equipment , listening to the equipment rather than the music."
I have noticed that the majority of the audio equipment displayed on AV is not high -end . Whether vintage are new .
"
Per your quote above, Robert Harley doesn't actually say the the audiophile equipment has to be high end. According to Harley, the audiophile is a person who is making an attempt at making the hardware disappear, etc.. A person who is contrained by budget, time, or environment but is doing his/her best within these contraints can fairly called an audiphile. Do you not agree? In any case even the highest end equipment doesn't disappear.
Another part of the Harley definition, (not that I necessarily agree with this part), is the the audiophile is "constantly changing equipment". I guess that leaves you out given your systems are mostly vintage when better newer equipment is available.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
That depends. Do you believe that being an audiophile is dependent on the price a person pays for their audio equipment? I don't see that in your definition, but it appears to be what matters to you.
So, what definition are we going by?
A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical. I again will use cars as an example, There is no doubt that Ferrari builds the finest sports cars in the world , Rolls Royce the finest luxury cars and Mercedes S series the finest high performance sedans. They are all expensive and not for everyone.
Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.
The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?
Yeah, several people have pointed that out. Not sure why he ignores it and keeps using are instead of or. I'm starting to get used to it. Maybe that's his plan.
How many lights do you see?
Four.
No, there are 5. Look again!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor
Per your quote above, Robert Harley doesn't actually say the the audiophile equipment has to be high end. According to Harley, the audiophile is a person who is making an attempt at making the hardware disappear, etc.. A person who is contrained by budget, time, or environment but is doing his/her best within these contraints can fairly called an audiphile. Do you not agree? In any case even the highest end equipment doesn't disappear.
Another part of the Harley definition, (not that I necessarily agree with this part), is the the audiophile is "constantly changing equipment". I guess that leaves you out given your systems are mostly vintage when better newer equipment is available.
You are correct I am no longer an audiophile. I ceased making attempts at upgrading audio equipment in 1975. For me I had reached the end of the line , my audiophile days lasted 20 years.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical. I again will use cars as an example, There is no doubt that Ferrari builds the finest sports cars in the world , Rolls Royce the finest luxury cars and Mercedes S series the finest high performance sedans. They are all expensive and not for everyone.
Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.
The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.
In that case, I reject you as having any kind of clue. I will no longer waste my time with you.
Unless it's to pick on you for being foolish.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
Yeah, several people have pointed that out. Not sure why he ignores it and keeps using are instead of or. I'm starting to get used to it. Maybe that's his plan.
How many lights do you see?
Four.
No, there are 5. Look again!
Is your interest grammar are audio , judging by your audio system it isn't audio.
-
Well, Marvin, you old hypocrite...
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical.
Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.
The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.
I guess it's time for you to sell all that old, outdated, obsolete crap you call a hi-fi and start looking and spending on some new stuff so you can hold on the your cherished title.
And, since you're in a spell-check mood, "I would not be surprise" makes no sense. The tense is wrong. Had you said either "I would not be surprised that an,,," or "It would not surprise me to see that an...".
In either case, your ignorance and lack of class is showing again. After all, how can one claim superiority if one cannot communicate correctly?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Is your interest grammar are audio , judging by your audio system it isn't audio.
Another foolish post by a foolish person. Try again.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajani
Based on your definition there are numerous audiophiles on this site... However, you are clearly not one of them....
The fact that you hold on to 50 year old equipment... means that you are not 'constantly changing equipment'...
And further, I would suspect that many of the posters here have spent more on audio equipment in the last 3 years, than you have in the last 20.... so to use your own words to describe your behaviour, it's.... CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP.....
Now stop pretending that your vintage gear is the best thing ever made, as an excuse to justify the fact that you can no longer afford 'high end' equipment... and even better yet... stop pretending to be an audiophile....
My dated audio equipment is worth three times as much as your so-called new audio equipment !
Yes I am not an audiophile but neither are you !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
Is there anyone on this forum that knows the difference between "are" (a verb) and "or" (a conjunction)?
Are you hiding behind the fact that your audio system is low cost high-fi !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvin Da Blues
And.......
An excellent audio system , a true audiophile !
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
I guess it's time for you to sell all that old, outdated, obsolete crap you call a hi-fi and start looking and spending on some new stuff so you can hold on the your cherished title.
I would enjoy selling my old outdated obsolete equipment to you , but judging by your equipment , you can't afford it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
Yes I am not an audiophile but neither are you !
And who here ever claimed to be?
Now you're creating straw men? How disingenius of you.
-
Are we back in grade school now?
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
I would enjoy selling my old outdated obsolete equipment to you , but judging by your equipment , you can't afford it.
Wow. I'm hurt. how can I ever show my face here again.
It's too bad you'll never get to hear my equipment. I've heard your speakers (in other locations, of course) and, for my purposes, my speakers beat yours hands down. They are nice but present a sound and image that harks back to the days of Eisehnower and Magnavox consoles. Not that that's bad, mind you, but there have been tremendous improvements since then. If all I wanted was a trip down memory lane then they would be perfect but, sorry, that's not for me. I don't have the toom to store antiques. So, enjoy your big, impressive boxes. a perfect, bloated, icon of days past, just like you.
It's too bad you can't appreciate a svelte planar. Obviously, you havent listened to music in the past fifty years either.
("Is your interest grammar are audio" Marvin, you ignorant, no stupid, putz. Don't you ever learn?)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
My dated audio equipment is worth three times as much as your so-called new audio equipment !
Yes I am not an audiophile but neither are you !
Congratulations!!!! I'm glad you finally realize that....
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
I would enjoy selling my old outdated obsolete equipment to you , but judging by your equipment , you can't afford it.
Wow, how far we have come. What's really striking to me is that my Grandfather owned a pair of speakers just like the ones you own Mr. Walker. I just don't remeber him being a pr!ck about it to others who didn't have the same gear. If you relish your old gear, thats great. I applaud you for your wise purchse 30 YEARS ago.
You remind me of the one drunk who hangs out at the end of the bar. All he can do is be a loudmouthed ass, and remind people of what a "star" he was in High School. Relive the glory days old man, and keep telling yourself that it was the best it will ever be. But I'm not trapped in your delusional ramblings, and neither are the rest of us. As my father in law says "I could complain, but no one would care. So why complain. If your not happy, work to change it. If not, shut the hell up!"
You need to go to www.audiowannabesfortotallosers.com I think you would fit right in. You might even get to be president some day.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by melvin walker
A very easy question . Certainly the price of audio equipment is critical. I again will use cars as an example, There is no doubt that Ferrari builds the finest sports cars in the world , Rolls Royce the finest luxury cars and Mercedes S series the finest high performance sedans. They are all expensive and not for everyone.
Audio is no different the finest audio equipment is very expensive ,it is not unusual to spend as much as $20,000 for power amps or $50,000 for speakers. I would not be surprise that an audiophiles system today would be in the $40,000 range.
The audiophile is looking for the best. That means spending money , making changes , in a never ending attempt for perfection.
so you say the one owning all the exotic audio gears 'just because he can' is more of an audiophile than another person, who owns slightly less exotic gear but actually cares about it, and tries to get the most out of it?
let me give you the example with cars: there are people owning all the rolls royces and ferraris, just because they can afford them, but there are also people looking for a really good car and cannot afford the ferrari or the rolls, they settle with a B&W 5 series, but does that mean they like the car less than the one with the rolls? NO. all it says is that the person with the rolls has more money.
same with audio. most people cannot afford to have all the exotic gears, but does that mean that they don't care about it? and does it mean that the person with the best equipment ever made cares about it? no.
sure equipment has something to do with being an audiophile, and sure an audiophile is always looking for 'the best', which, by the way, hasn't been defined yet. I for example would hate the sound of your JBL's, just because I don't like the JBL sound, and especially not the horn sound.
no.
Being an audiophile involves loving your gears as much as the music. It takes care, time, and love.
you can be an audiophile if you haven't upgraded your equipment for the past 20 years. Because there is always something you can improve in your system without having to upgrade. Also, there is always better, it just never ends, so following your definition (well, not yours, but one from some big guide to things that aren't even defined, and can't be defined), no one on this entire planet is an audiophile.
that said, evaluate my system as much as you want, and say whatever you want, but all I know is that I love my system, I care about it, just as I love the music. That, In my opinion, makes me and other people an audiophile.
Keep them spinning,
Bert.
-
I'm NOT clicking on that link Beefy!:hand:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by markw
What a horrid way to listen to music. That's like focusing in on a tiny imperfection on a beautiful woman's shoulder while making slow, sweet love.
Oh Jeeeeeeeeezzz. :cryin:
(doing my best to trash this thread)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich-n-Texas
Oh Jeeeeeeeeezzz. :cryin:
(doing my best to trash this thread)
It would have to be some kind of imperfection. Like a festering blackhead, or a really hairy mole. That could ruin the mood, no matter how hot she is.
-
No. Only if she had hairs growing out her nipples.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich-n-Texas
No. Only if she had hairs growing out her nipples.
I must confess I once dated a gal who had hair on her nipples. She was subsequently dropped in lieu of someone who didn't. It was rather distracting.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
I must confess I once dated a gal who had hair on her nipples. She was subsequently dropped in lieu of someone who didn't. It was rather distracting.
Well there goes my breakfast.
-
Equating price with love for sound is like saying that the guy with the most expensive pool cue will always win in a match. Just foolishness.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luvin Da Blues
Well there goes my breakfast.
Why? Were you going to eat a hairy nipple, and now are reconsidering? Please don't stop on my account. If hairy nipples are your bag, we are all ok with that.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMichael
Equating price with love for sound is like saying that the guy with the most expensive pool cue will always win in a match. Just foolishness.
Uhhh... EXCUSE ME?!?!?!
-
Isn't Hairy Nipple the name of a mixed drink?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
I must confess I once dated a gal who had hair on her nipples. She was subsequently dropped in lieu of someone who didn't. It was rather distracting.
I was waiting for this one. :ihih:
I also dated a gal who had a single hair growing out of her aeriola (sp?) She was actually very proud of that hair, and wouldn't let me bite it off. :incazzato:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich-n-Texas
Isn't Hairy Nipple the name of a mixed drink?
That's a "slippery nipple." Not the same.
I have a $2000 Q and have been beaten by guys who used a house Q.
I have also beaten guys who use $20,000 Q's.
Price of equipment does not equal love for the game and/or ability.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groundbeef
Why? Were you going to eat a hairy nipple, and now are reconsidering? Please don't stop on my account. If hairy nipples are your bag, we are all ok with that.
No and No, I like my women barren. :ihih:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by GM
I have a $2000 Q...
:yikes: Oh... Nevermind.
(mine's $200)
|